To me, the most over-used word in football today is "Tempo". It seems that every time a team goes no-huddle on TV, the announcer utters the dreaded t-word; sometimes, it reinforces how little some "football people" know.

At any rate, I sometimes see offenses that claim to be "spread/ tempo" teams that aren't much different than I-formation or Wing-T teams running the probing FB Belly play over and over again: nothing really wrong with it, but is it REALLY attacking the defense as advertised? Sometimes, it gets a little, well - ridiculous...

The bottom line: I am all for fast-paced play calling, but NOT at the expense of actually attacking the defense. Attacking a defense the full depth and width of a field can sometimes take a few seconds longer than normal, but done correctly, can prove to be more effective than simply running plays every 5 seconds. To be clear, the "normal" pace I am talking about still snaps the ball every 20 seconds of real time; the main benefits of the no huddle offense are 1) the amount of practice reps a team can get and 2) the ability to dictate to the defense -- as long as the offense allows this to happen.

This is why I love the way the Patriots attack a defense: each and every play has a specific design and intention. The tlking heads on in the media are quick to state "well they have Tom Brady." However, further examination of their method reveals relatively simple throws and catches. In fact, so simple that most high schools possess these combinations. What these high schools don't have is the field general in Brady that can adjust routes and redirect his thought process at the line of scrimmage.

BUT - these high schools can develop a system that allows the coach to do this for the player...

Two weeks ago against Kansas City, the Pats utilized the slant/flat combination (below) more than most teams will use it in a whole season. Below is a generic diagram, of what we call "B FIST" which tags the inside receiver and stands for "FLAT INSIDE of SLANT":

FIST is a pretty generic 2 on 1 stretch vs. the flat defender. What makes it hard to call (if you are going to be in a standard 2x2 set) is the fact that a Cover 4 safety will be sitting in the middle of the pass pattern for the interception or big hit on the receiver.

This brings us to the lost art of using formations and motions. With all the craze regarding running plays as fast as possible, formationing to get match-ups is becoming a thing of the past for many. Using the example above, look at a very simple throws created simply by manipulating the formation.

Below, the RB is the outside receiver, Edelman is the middle man, and Gronkowsly is the third receiver to the top of the screen. The Pats are going to run Slant/Flat with the Edelman and Gronk. But - because it is with done with the RB outside of them, the defense is forced to cover down accordingly. Whether a defense is in man or zone, the slant will now get pretty generic coverage; if Edelman is doubled by the inside linebacker, Gronkowski is open in the flat. This will look like a very typical slant-flat read in the "olden times" of Cover 3:

# 90 must now cover the flat route, and you can see the play developing...

The result is a throw and catch that I might be able to make (and certainly most competent QBs).

Even thought they lost yesterday, the Patriots are still the best in the NFL at dictating matchups. And while no one except them has Tom Brady, one can use Advantage Principles (like Maverick below)...

Or RAM (Below) to direct the QB thought process, and thus, the ball:

Most coaches want simplicity for their players, and I think up-tempo helps with this. But, as an offensive coach, I thought it was my job to help the QB through the process. Movement, personnel groupings, and read types (and Navigation Tags) are all part of the package. If an offense only has one method of attack, the defense will eventually adjust.

​Bottom line: Getting lots of plays called and using formations and personnel do not need to be mutually exclusive. But - one does (once again) need an apparatus in which to do so. This is where our system has proven to be superior.